Improved reliability of assays using a multi-divot platform and multi-source, multi-cell type clusters

ABSTRACT

Described herein are 3-dimensional clusters of reaggregated cells comprising cells reaggregated from at least two different cell sources, such as different cell types, different donors, and combinations thereof. Methods of making, using, and cryopreserving these 3-dimensional clusters of reaggregated cells are also described herein.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is a divisional of U.S. Ser. No. 14/436,041,which is the U.S. National Stage of PCT/US2013/064583, filed Oct. 11,2013, which claims the priority benefit of U.S. Provisional PatentApplication Ser. No. 61/715,570, filed Oct. 18, 2012, entitled IMPROVEDRELIABILITY OF ASSAYS USING A MULTI-DIVOT PLATFORM AND MULTI-SOURCE,MULTI-CELL TYPE CLUSTERS, each of which is incorporated by reference inits entirety herein.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to multi-source, multi-cell clusters andmethods of making, using, and cryopreserving the same.

Description of Related Art

Three-dimensional (“3-D”) cell clusters exhibit properties not seen inconventional two-dimensional cell culture. Islets of Langerhans are cellclusters within the pancreas composed of a variety of cell typesincluding alpha-, beta-, and delta-cells, and are responsible for themaintenance of blood glucose level. Lymphocyte destruction of beta-cells(insulin-producing cells) or failure to utilize insulin are the hallmarkevents that result in type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively.Isolating islets from the pancreas of donors provides tissue that can beused for research, transplantation and drug discovery in order todevelop therapies for diabetes. Once isolated from their naturallocation within the pancreas, islets exhibit diminished survival andfunction, both in vitro studies and soon after transplantation. Withinthe pancreas, islets are immersed with their native blood supply. Afterisolation, diffusion becomes the primary means of oxygen, glucose, andnutrient transport into the core of isolated native islets. Empiricalmodeling of diffusion barriers in native, isolated islets hasdemonstrated that only the outermost layers of cells are exposed toglucose and sufficient oxygen levels, resulting in core cell death.Engineering optimal islets provides a means to overcome the diffusionbarriers affected by islet size limitations.

While 3-D cell clusters, such as islets, can be engineered using avariety of techniques, they still have many problems when used indifferent applications. For example:

Non-uniform cell number and composition in each cluster

High diffusion barrier

Not compatible with the pharmaceutical industry high-throughputinstruments

Not scalable to high-throughput needs

Not able to maintain long-term experiments

Improvements in micro-mold technology (US 2010/0233239; US 2013/0029875,both incorporated by reference herein in their entireties) allow thecreation of high numbers of 3-D cell clusters, such as isletsreaggregated from individual islets cells in the micro-mold. However,even with these advances, limitations still exist including inconsistentresponse between donors to test compounds, and the fact that 3-Dclusters cannot be stored and shipped without significant loss oftissue. Described herein are new methods and devices that overcome theseand other problems, resulting in new applications of 3-D cell clusters.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is broadly concerned with 3-dimensional clustersof reaggregated cells comprising cells reaggregated from at least twodifferent cell sources, such as different cell types, different donors,and combinations thereof.

Methods of forming 3-dimensional clusters of reaggregated cells are alsodescribed herein. The methods generally comprise providing a micro-moldas described in US 2010/0233239 or US 2013/0029875, incorporated byreference herein, and single cells from at least two different sources.All references to “MicroMold,” “micromold,” “micro-mold,” or “micromold” refer to the same general micro-molds, as described in US2010/0233239; US 2013/0029875, and described herein. In general, themicro-molds comprise a non-adherent, divoted substrate comprising asubstantially planar top surface, wherein the substantially planar topsurface comprises a plurality of divots formed therein. The single cellsare introduced into the divots, wherein each divot contains a mixture ofsingle cells from at least two different sources. For example, thesingle cells are dispersed from the selected tissue and then loaded,plated, or seeded onto the micro-mold wherein they settle into therecesses of the divots. The micro-mold is incubated under cell cultureconditions, wherein the single cells in each divot reaggregate into a3-dimensional cell cluster comprising cells reaggregated from at leasttwo different cell sources.

Methods of building immunotolerance in a transplant recipient are alsodescribed herein. The methods generally comprise providing stem cellsfrom a donor, and injecting the donor stem cells into the recipient. A3-dimensional cluster of reaggregated cells as described hereincomprising stem cells from the donor and tissue cells to be transplantedis then transplanted (e.g., injected) into the recipient.Advantageously, the recipient requires lower amounts ofimmunosuppressing agents, if any, after this procedure.

Additional methods of building immunotolerance in a transplant recipientare also described herein. The methods generally comprise providing a3-dimensional cluster of reaggregated cells from at least two differentcell sources, wherein at least one cell source comprises stem cells fromthe recipient and at least one cell source comprises donor tissue to betransplanted. The 3-dimensional cluster of reaggregated cells istransplanted into the recipient. Advantageously, the recipient requireslower amounts of immunosuppressing agents, if any, after this procedure.

Also described herein are methods of screening xenobiotic testcompounds. The methods generally comprise providing a multi-source,3-dimensional cluster of reaggregated cells as described herein. The3-dimensional cluster is exposed to a xenobiotic test compound, and theresponse of the 3-dimensional cluster to the xenobiotic test compound isanalyzed. Advantageously, the 3-dimensional cluster provides an averagedresponse in one step as opposed to analyzing each cell sourceindividually and calculating an averaged response.

Methods of cryopreserving 3-dimensional cell clusters are also describedherein. The methods generally comprise suspending a 3-dimensionalcluster in freezing media, and cryopreserving the 3-dimensional clusterunder controlled rate freezing at a rate of −1° C./min to yield acryopreserved 3-dimensional cell cluster. The freezing media comprisescell culture media, curcumin, and a cryoprotectant. In one or moreembodiments, the 3-dimensional cluster of reaggregated cells is anengineered islet. Advantageously, due to the improved diffusion barriersof the engineered islets, these islets have increased viability ascompared to a native cryopreserved and thawed islets.

Also described herein are methods of cryopreserving cells for3-dimensional cell clusters. The methods generally comprise dispersingcells from a tissue (e.g., pancreatic tissue) into single cells, andsuspending those single cells in freezing media. The freezing mediacomprises cell culture media, curcumin, and a cryoprotectant. The singlecells are then cryopreserved under controlled rate freezing at a rate of−1° C./min to yield cryopreserved single cells. The cryopreserved singlecells are then thawed and transferred to a micro-mold, each containing aplurality of the thawed single cells; and incubated under cell cultureconditions, wherein the single cells in each divot reaggregate into a3-dimensional cell cluster comprising cells reaggregated from thecryopreserved and thawed single cells. Advantageously, for example, whenthe inventive method is used to create engineered islets, these isletshave increased viability as compared to native cryopreserved and thawedislets.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed incolor. Copies of this patent or patent application publication withcolor drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and paymentof the necessary fee.

FIG. 1(A) is a graph comparing the glucose-stimulated insulin releasefrom large and small islets from the same donor; (B) shows the responseto increasing doses of glucose in Kanslets derived from a mixture oflarge and small islets from the same donor;

FIG. 2 is a graph comparing the glucose-stimulated insulin release fromtwo different donors with completely different responses. Islets wereexposed to high glucose for 60 min, starting at time 0. When the cellswere first combined in the micro-mold to make multi-donor clusters, theresponse to the same concentrations of glucose fell in between theoriginal tissue clusters;

FIG. 3 is a perspective illustration of the design of micro-mold 1.0;

FIG. 4 illustrates that variations in divot depth create morespecificity for the end-user;

FIG. 5 illustrates the design of micro-mold 2.0 with a singledivot/well: (A) perspective view; (B) side view; (C) close-up view;

FIG. 6 illustrates the design of micro-mold 2.2 with multiple divots perwell: (A) perspective view; (B) top-down view;

FIG. 7 illustrates that the micro-molds can be designed to fit withinthe well of other standard plates (A) or can be a free-standing mold(B).

FIG. 8 illustrates engineered islets from two different donors(symbolized by different colors) are mixed (left); and unique engineeredislets that contain cells from each of the two donors (right);

FIG. 9 is a graph of the results from multi-donor islets. Islets fromdonor 1 dumped large amounts of insulin with no stimulated release tohigh glucose (17.5 mM) or K+ (20 mM). Donor 2 had no high glucoseresponse. However, when the islets were engineered into uniformmulti-donor spheroids, the clusters had a normal response to glucose andhigh K+(p<0.001);

FIG. 10 shows VYBRANT® viability staining of cryopreserved native humanislets (A) verses engineered islets produced from cryopreserved, single,dispersed human islet cells (B). The yellow and green stains representdead cells.

FIG. 11 is a schematic of a cryopreservation procedure. First, nativeislets are dispersed into single cells for freezing. Upon thawing, thecells are immediately loaded into the micro-mold. The resulting 3-D cellcluster has a higher viability and can be comprised of cells from asingle donor or multiple donors.

FIG. 12 is an image of a mixture of rat bone marrow stem cells and isletcells producing hybrid cell clusters;

FIG. 13 is a graph showing the viability of cell clusters is improvedwhen the mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are combined with islet cells.Apoptotic and necrotic cells both represent dead cells;

FIG. 14 shows immunofluorescence images of hybrid clusters stained for βcells (A, green), α (B, blue), MSCs (C, red) and β, α, MSC cells (D);

FIG. 15 is an image of decellularized Wharton's Jelly with multi-celltype islet spheroids;

FIG. 16 shows graphs of viable and dead (apoptotic and necrotic) cellsafter thawing following prolonged cryopreservation. The graphs representthe different protocol alterations that were made to obtain the optimalcryopreservation protocol. A) Different DMSO levels were tried; B)Different equilibration times were tested; and C) Different medias weretested;

FIG. 17 shows (A) The staining of the cryopreserved native islets fordead cells. The green fluorescent stain is the apoptotic stain; and (B)A graph showing that there is no statistically significant difference inthe percentage of live cells between the fresh and cryopreserved (CP)Kanslets;

FIG. 18 show a graph indicating that the fresh Kanslets respondappropriately to increasing doses of glucose, and after cryopreservationand thawing, the Kanslets from the same donor responded in an equivalentmanner; and

FIG. 19 is an additional illustration of cryopreservation methods,showing the traditional method for cryopreserving intact native islets,and the inventive procedure.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present invention is concerned with improved 3-D cell clusters andmethods of making, using, and storing the same. Embodiments of theinvention are particularly useful in forming reaggregated clusters ofcells that approximate native 3-dimensional tissues, such as islets,tumors, and the like.

As used herein, the term “islet” refers to a group of specialized cellsin the pancreas that make and secrete hormones. An islet generallycontains one or more of the following cell types: (1) alpha cells thatmake glucagon, which raises the level of glucose (sugar) in the blood;(2) beta cells that make insulin; (3) delta cells that make somatostatinwhich inhibits the release of numerous other hormones in the body; (4)pancreatic peptide producing PP cells; (5) D1 cells, which secretevasoactive intestinal peptide; and (6) EC cells which secrete secretin,motilin, and substance P. As used herein, the term “islet cell” refersto any individual cell found in an islet. The islet cells used inembodiments of the present invention are preferably a combination ofinsulin-producing beta cells with other islet cell types. As usedherein, the term “native islet” refers to intact islets isolated from amammalian pancreas. Other types of primary cells are also contemplatedfor use herein, wherein the term “primary cell” refers to cells isolateddirectly from living tissue, as contrasted with established cell lines.

As used herein, the term “reaggregated islet” is used synonymously with“engineered islet” and refers to a 3-D cluster of islet cells formed invitro through self-directed assembly. These reaggregated islets are alsoreferred to as Kanslets™. Preferably, the reaggregation of individualislet cells into engineered islets is influenced by the physicaldimensions of the divots in the micro-mold. Likewise, references to“reaggregated” cell clusters refer to 3-D clusters of cells formed invitro through self-directed assembly. The term “spheroid” is also usedherein due to the generally spherical shape of the clusters.Reaggregating tissue in an optimized manner using the engineeredmicro-mold approach has immense impact for three-dimensional tissueproduction and its subsequent use in research, drug discovery, and theclinic.

When conducting studies on the effect of specific drug compounds onanimal or human tissue, the variability between donors interferes withthe interpretation of the results. Even with information about thehealth of a donor, the purity, and viability of the tissue, the resultsobtained vary greatly from donor-to-donor. This high variability resultsin inconsistent responses to test compounds and other assays. Even morefrustrating is the variability that occurs within cells and tissues fromthe same donor. For example, it has been reported that small isletsrelease more insulin in response to high glucose concentrations thanlarge islets (MacGregor et al., 2006). FIG. 1(A) illustrates this point.Islets taken from the same donor were separated into large and smallsizes and exposed to high glucose at time 0. The small islets had asignificantly higher release of insulin at normal and high glucose (20mM) concentrations compared to the large islets. Thus, even islets fromthe same donor demonstrate variations in their response to standardstimulants. However, this variability can be reduced when the isletsfrom a single individual are dispersed into single cells andreaggregated into Kanslets that contain a mixture of both large andsmall islets, as shown in FIG. 1B. This reduced variability can beidentified by the smaller standard error bars. In addition, the standarddeviation is greater than 2 times smaller in the mixed Kanslets thancombining the response of large and small islets.

This variability is increased exponentially, when dealing with isletsfrom more than one donor. A stark example of this variability can beillustrated in islets obtained from a set of two human donors. In bothcases, the islets used were obtained through the same donor consortium.Both sets of islets were of high purity, high viability, and came fromdonors that fit the criteria as a suitable drug testing candidateincluding, but not limited to, being non-diabetic. FIG. 2 illustratesthe glucose response of large and small islets from two different humandonors. These two donors were well matched: neither was diabetic andboth had a body mass index (BMI) that indicated they were in the normalweight category. Donor 1 showed a typical response to high glucose withan increase in insulin secretion from small islets, and no response inlarge islets. In contrast, donor 2 showed a different result with noinsulin secretion from small islets, but a delayed response in largeislets (FIG. 2). This simple example shows one of the majorcomplications of using human tissue for drug screening or diagnosticassays that hampers the entire pharmaceutical industry and thebiomedical field.

The response variability of islets hampers the discovery of new diabetesdrugs, but the same is true for drug discovery for other diseasesincluding (but not limited to): cancer, heart disease, vascular disease,and other endocrine disorders. The inherent variability fromperson-to-person could be accounted for mathematically by calculatingaverage responses from many donors. However, this process can becometime consuming and costly due to the high number of trials necessary todetermine significant results for each test compound. When a singlescreen might consist of 100,000 compounds, the barrier to using humantissue becomes apparent. The donor-to-donor variability and the naturalvariability to stimulants of cells from the same donor makes itdifficult, if not impossible, to use human tissues to screen largenumbers of compounds as potential new drugs for diabetes or otherpancreatic endocrine disorders.

Donor-to-donor variability poses difficulties when searching for newtherapeutics or conducting research, whether the tissue donor is humanor other species. As noted above, it is possible to solve this problemby conducting a large number of runs of a single experiment to producesignificant results. This can be coupled with complex statisticalanalysis aimed at finding the true “average” response. These studies arecostly and lengthy, and this complication increases exponentially in ahigh-throughput settings. Our technology proposes the use of multi-donor3-D spheroids, formed by mixing cells from a variety of donors togetherto produce 3-D cell clusters that represent a more “averaged” response.The micro-mold production and the reaggregation of cells into 3-Dclusters using the molds has been described in US 2010/0233239 or US2013/0029875 (see also FIGS. 3-7). Embodiments of the present inventionare concerned with new solutions for drug testing using 3-D cellspheroids, which can be organotypic or form a completely new(non-naturally-occurring) cell cluster. These multi-source cell clustersprovide a more “averaged” or representative response to xenobiotic testcompounds. In some aspects, the invention uses newly designedmicro-molds that allow more clusters per drug testing well. These newmulti-source cell clusters can also be produced using any technologythat enhances spheroid production including, but not limited to, thehanging drop method, rotation or gravity assisted methods, or othersuitable techniques.

While most other techniques to develop 3-D cell clusters solely rely oncultured cell lines, the micro-mold technology allows the creation ofmultiple sources of starting material including (but not limited to)cell culture lines, fresh human tissue, cryopreserved human tissue,fresh animal tissue, cryopreserved animal tissue, and geneticallyengineered cells from any source. In one aspect, the 3-D cell clusterscan comprise cells from different sources. A “source,” as used herein,refers to obtaining cells or tissues from various donors, biopsies,tissue resections from different tissue samples or different tissuesources, different animals harboring cells (species or strains), orprimary, secondary, immortalized, or transformed/engineered cells. Thecells may be derived (directly or indirectly) from any suitable human oranimal donor, including human, porcine, simian, canine, feline, bovine,equine, ovine, leporine, or murine sources, among others. Examples ofsuch tissues would include (but not be limited to) organs, chondrocytes,osteocytes, myocytes, vascular cells, skin/epithelial cells, and/or stemcells (embryonic and adult). Cells or tissue that are considered to beobtained from “different” sources include those obtained from donors ofdifferent genders, genotypes, ages, races (e.g., Caucasian, etc.),enzymatic or metabolic activities, species, or disease or health states(e.g., tissue from a diabetic donor, tissue from a donor with normalinsulin production, tissue from a donor with heart disease, canceroustissue, etc.). “Different” sources also includes different cell typesand functions. For example, multi-functional clusters can also beprepared which secrete more than one hormone (e.g., insulin-producingand thyroid hormone-producing clusters).

1. Multiple Cell Type Clusters

3-D cell clusters could be formed from starting material from a singleorgan, or could comprise starting material from multiple tissue types.For example, cardiac myocytes could be mixed with vascular endothelialcells to create a 3-D cell cluster comprising myocytes and vascularendothelial cells to be implanted in a diseased heart. The endothelialcells would enhance blood vessel formation to the new heart cells.Likewise, islet clusters could be formed with vascular endothelial cellsagain with the goal of speeding vessel formation into the transplantedislets. In some cases, multiple cell types can be harvested from asingle organ, and would be considered multi-sourced. The multi-cell typeclusters could be formed from human tissues or from any animal species,or a mixture of species. For some types of research, 3-D cell clusterscan be made with cancer cells.

A. Protocols for Multi-Cell Type Clusters

When creating multi-cell type 3-D cell clusters, two basic protocols canbe followed.

1. Whole tissue containing multiple cell types such as hepatocytes,fibroblasts, endothelial cells, and smooth muscle cells could all comefrom the same liver sample. After dispersion of the tissue, usingenzymes or other standard procedures, the single cells would remain in amixture of cell types and would be dispersed a one aliquot into themicro-mold. Upon loading into the micro-mold and entering the divots,the mixture of cell types bind to each other forming a multi-cell type3-D cell cluster.

2. Alternatively, a 3-D cell cluster with an enhanced fraction of onecell type may be desired. The starting material can be derived from pureor semi-pure fractions of individual cells types. For example, cellsfrom the pancreas would be separated using flow cytometry into isletbeta cells, alpha cells and delta cells. In order to form 3-D clustersthat had the same average naturally-occurring ratio of these three celltypes, as the native islet, the separated fractions would be mixed in aspecific ratio. In the case of islet cells, that ratio could be about70% beta, about 20% alpha and about 10% delta. The exact ratio of thecell types would be determined by the end user and has unlimitedpossible iterations. For example, in one or more embodiments, cell ratioin the clusters could be: from about 60-90% beta cells, from about10-40% alpha cells, and from about 0-10% delta cells, with the provisothat alpha is greater than delta. The mixture of cells would then beloaded into the micro-mold as described previously.

One specific example of protocol #2, includes the combining of organtissue with stem cells. In one example, individual islet cells could bemixed with undifferentiated cells (i.e., stem cells) prior to loading inthe micro-mold. This procedure would result in a hybrid islet/stem cell3-D cluster. There are multiple purposes for such an approach. In oneexample the stem cells may differentiate into another cell based on thechemical and physical signals from the differentiated cells in thecluster. Alternatively, the stem cells could be mixed into the hybrid3-D cell cluster as a way to confer immunotolerance into the recipientof a transplant with said hybrid clusters. We have utilized ratios ofislet cells to stem cells of 2:1, 1:1 and 1:2, all with successfulresulting engineered islets. All ratios of the starting cell types couldbe varied by the end-user with endless combinations. For example, otherratios include islet to stem cell ratios of 1:6, 1:3 and up to 100:1. Itwill be appreciated that the ratio will also depend somewhat on thenumber of cells used in each cluster. In one or more embodiments, thereare at least 7 cells in the hybrid cluster (6 islet cells and 1 stemcell). For example, this cluster could consist (essentially) of 3 betacells, 2 alpha cells, 1 delta cell, and 1 stem cell. In otherembodiments, the reengineered islets will comprise about 50-100 isletcells and appropriate ratios of stem cells. In one or more embodiments,stems cells account for about 10% or even about 25% of the total cellsin the 3-D cluster. In this same example, rather than mixing the nativecells with stem cells, the hybrid could also be formed with native cellsand engineered cells, according to any of the ratios mentioned above.

One important application concerning stem cell/differentiated cellmixtures would be to build immunotolerance in a transplant recipient. Inone example stem cells from the donor would first be injected into therecipient to prime the recipient's immune system. Subsequently thehybrid stem cell/differentiated cell cluster would be transplanted intothe recipient. If immunotolerance is obtained, the recipient wouldrequire no, or lower amounts of, immunosuppressing agentspost-transplant. In another embodiment, the recipients own stem cellscould be mixed with transplant cells from a donor and reaggregated intoa 3-D cluster for transplantation. The recipient's own stem cells canhelp decrease the chance of rejection of the transplanted cells in the3-D cluster. This embodiment is described more particularly below withrespect to bone marrow stem cells and donor islet cells.

In the case of engineered cells, genetically- or chemically-engineeredcells could be mixed with the same cell type or different tissues usingnative or other genetically-engineered cells. For example, nativecancerous multiple myeloma cells generally do not adhere to each otherstrongly enough to produce 3-D clusters that can be removed from themold. One could either genetically or chemically alter the cells when inthe single cell form, before loading into the mold in order to enhancecell-to-cell binding, and thus formation of the 3-D cluster.Alternatively, the multiple myeloma cells could be mixed with othercells types such as fibroblasts or stem cells, which would enhancecell-to-cell binding. In another embodiment, a 3-D cluster of stem cellscould be first formed, and then the multiple myeloma cells (or othercell type) could be mixed with the 3-D cluster, or cells could be addedat different time points rather than at the exact same time. Thisalternative technique would build a multi-layer cluster or cause thecells to merge on their own. It will be appreciated that the cellisolation procedure, cluster formation media, conditions and time canall be optimized to the cell types being used.

One example of multiple cell type clusters is the stem cell/adult cell.Rather than mixing stem cells with differentiated cells to create ahybrid cell cluster, one could also begin with stem cells anddifferentiate them into a single cell type or multiple cell types. Forexample human stem cells could be formed into cartilage-producingchondrocytes and bone-forming osteoblasts. The 3-D cell clusters fromthese different products could then be mixed and placed in a joint tobuild an improved bony surface and increase cartilage.

Epithelial cell clusters or stem cell clusters could be used as fillersto fill defects, scars, or void spaces.

B. Multi-Donor Cell Clusters

In this embodiment, there are two possible pathways to multi-source 3-Dcell cluster formation. The first pathway would produce the cellclusters using tissue from a single donor, then after the clusters wereproduced, they would be combined with the clusters from a number ofother donors and used as a mixed experiment (FIG. 8, left). The secondpathway entails dispersing cells from a variety of individuals intosingle cells, mixing the cells together, and then producing individualcell clusters that represent mixed cells from several donors (FIG. 8,right). This would result in individual cell clusters composed ofseveral cell types from several donors. The ratio of cells canpreferentially be mixed at a 1:1:1 ratio or any other specified ratio.Cells could be counted before mixing them to ensure appropriatemixtures. For instance, 1 million cells from donor A can be mixed with 1million cells from donor B. The mixed cell population would then beseeded onto the micro-mold (FIGS. 3-7) or any other suitable mold orscaffold. Seeding could take place by mixing the cells first and seedingonce onto the scaffold or mold, or could occur with sequential seeding,as a tissue printing instrument or cell dispensing unit would do. Oncethe multi-donor clusters are produced, experimentation could occurproviding an averaged result in one step as opposed to running eachdonor individually and then having to statistically determine thecommonalities between results. One application of the mixed bone marrowstem cells/islet cluster would be in the field of tissuetransplantation. Bone marrow stem cells could be harvested from therecipient of a transplant prior to the transplant itself or from thedonor of the transplant. Those stem cells would be mixed with the donorislet cells (or other cells types depending on the pathology to betreated) using the micro-mold. The resulting hybrid spheroid would be acombination of the recipient's own stem cells and the islet cells fromanother donor.

Unique to this technology is the ability to, not only mix the cells ofseveral donors into a single batch, but to specify traits or criterionfor specific experiments. For instance, a multi-donor study could bespecifically run on cells from female or male individuals. Other groupscould include limiting multi-donor spheroids to a specific race, age,sex, geographical region, body mass index, disease state, or anypossible variation of this theme.

When examining sex differences in disease states, female-specific andmale-specific cell clusters might be used. This would apply to humansand all other animal species. If the target disease were transmittedfrom one sex to another, single cell clusters with both sex-based cellscould be created so that the cells from a male and female were in directcontact within the cell cluster. Similarly, when examining speciesdifferences in disease states, cell clusters of different species mightbe used. This would apply to humans and all other animal species. Forexample, when testing drugs or therapeutics with the potential to alterthe transmission of agents, such as prions, that can cross species, cellclusters from the different infecting species may be combined. If thetarget disease were transmitted from one species to another, single cellclusters with both species-based cells (e.g., hybrid clusters) could becreated so that the cells from both species were in direct contactwithin the cell cluster.

C. Species-Specific and Multi-Species Cell Clusters

The examples provided previously, mainly focused on human tissues andthe formation of hybrid cell clusters from that starting material.However, the donor tissue may be from non-human sources. In animals,multi-donor cell clusters could be used to make species-specificclusters. For example, to find new drugs to treat common respiratoryproblems in cattle, bovine lung clusters could be formed for drugscreening. The clusters could also be made to be strain-specific. Italso allows the screening of large numbers of drugs for a subpopulation.A subpopulation could be a specific ethnic group, a strain of animal, orit could be a subpopulation with a specific disease. For example, it maybe difficult to obtain enough biopsy material from a rare solid tumorfrom one person, but with the procedure described here, biopsy materialfrom many people with the same sub-type of tumor could be mixed. Thiswould provide enough material for a small or rare tumor to be able toscreen 1000's of potential drug compounds at one time. Alternatively,people with rare genetic disorders could be grouped and their tissuescombined to provide enough non-cultured tissue for screening.

Species-specific donor populations are important in addressing animalhealth and the human food chain. Specific species and strains of animalsrequire health treatment options that are unique for theirsubpopulation. For example, Burmese cats contract diabetes at a higherrate than other cat strains. Thus, one would want to study and testislet cell clusters specific to that strain of animal. Multi-donorBurmese cat engineered islets could be useful in testing new drugs totreat the high degree of diabetes in these animals. This can provide asimplified approach to answering questions about drug responses ordiagnostic tests within population subgroups.

Joint problems, specifically in dogs and horses are a serious and costlyproblem. Injection of chondrocytic cell clusters that werespecies-specific, would have great healing potential. Alternatively,drug screening for species specific problems, such as dog tumors couldbe done using 3-D cell clusters from the original tumor tissue. Thiscould be used as an in vitro screening mechanism to screen large numbersof experimental compounds before in vivo testing. Alternatively aportion of a biopsied tumor could be dispersed into single cells andpossible commercially-available chemotherapy drugs could be tested onthe 3-D cell clusters from that dog's specific tumor. The results of thekill rate on the tumor from that dog would guide the veterinarian inhis/her choice of therapeutic approach.

There may be times when multi-species 3-D cell clusters are required.For example, when one is studying the transmission of disease from onespecies to another, having cell clusters from multiple species in thesame experimental aliquot would be useful. This would be done followingthe procedures described above and illustrated in FIG. 8 (left).Alternatively, if close contact between cells is required to transmitthe disease, then 3-D cell clusters with multiple species within thesame cluster would be needed (FIG. 8, right image).

D. Cell Clusters and Scaffolds

While most of the 3-D cell clusters produced by the micro-molds arescaffold-free, it is possible to produce 3-D cell clusters in themicro-molds using scaffolds.

1. Scaffold/Cell Cluster Formation

Bio-based or cell-produced scaffolds can be created by addingfibroblasts or other cells responsible for producing extracellularmatrix to the mold at the time of seeding with the cells of interest.These fibroblasts would produce collagen creating a natural scaffold forthe 3-D cell cluster. In addition, growth factors or matrix proteinscould be added to the media while the 3-D cell clusters were forming.For example, BD Matrigel™ Matrix (Bedford, Mass.), which containscollagen, laminin, entactin, and growth factors, is a suitable bio-basedscaffolding material that could be used in such embodiments. In thisexample, cells would normally be seeded into the micro-mold. On certaindays during the cluster formation process hormones or other proteins orscaffold-enhancing products would be added to the media to enhancecluster formation and scaffold development. One example would be themixture of cardiac myocytes with fibroblasts and vascular endothelialcells and extra media amino acids. This iteration would increase vesselformation, along with scaffolds that would penetrate the cardiac clusterto increase the penetration of the vessel into the core of the clusterwhere blood vessel exchange is critical. Another example comprisesadding all the cells together on day one with a media component toinitiate cell cluster formation, but then exclude those components fromfresh media added on future dates, where that initial addition ofcomponents was sufficient for cluster formation. This could also helpspeed up cluster formation by assistance.

2. Scaffold Addition to Micro-Mold

Alternatively, multi-source spheroids could be created within orattached to a scaffold material. For example, when the cell clusterswere nearly formed (i.e., day 4 in the micro-mold), scaffold materialcould be added to the micro-molds and overlaid on the cell clusters.Suction would draw the cell clusters to the scaffold, where they wouldstick on the bottom surface. This scaffold could be formed of abiodegradable biomaterial. Some suitable biodegradable biomaterialsinclude poly(DL-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLO), polylactic acid (PLA), orpoly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA). The scaffold could be coated orimpregnated with a number of molecules to enhance cell adhesion, cellviability, cell function or alter the immune response to the scaffoldmaterial. Alternatively, the size of the pore within a biopolymer may besuitable for natural formation of uniform cells spheroids.

E. Cryopreservation and the Production of 3-D Cell Clusters UsingCryopreserved Tissue

A key hurdle to the production of multi-source 3-D spheroids is theavailability of tissue sources. Multi-donor human islets are generallyonly possible when multiple tissue donations are available within daysof each other, and thus can be mixed when producing the multi-donorislets (FIG. 8). In order to scale-up the multi-donor product,cryopreservation (or quick deep freezing) presents itself as an idealsolution to storing tissue from donors until enough donors are collectedfor a particular experiment, transplant or other need.

Unfortunately, researchers face major obstacles when cryopreserving 3-Dcell clusters (Lakey et al., 2003). At the core of the issues is celldestruction during the freezing process, leading to decreased viability.As used herein, the term “cell viability” refers to a measure of theamount of cells that are living or dead, based on a total cell sample.High cell viability, as defined herein, refers to a cell population inwhich greater than 85% of all cells are viable, preferably greater than90-95%, and more preferably a population characterized by high cellviability contains more than 99% viable cells.

FIG. 10A illustrates the dramatic cell loss that occurs when intact,native islets are subjected to current cryopreservation techniques. Uponthawing, a majority of the cell have died (green and yellow staining ofFIG. 10A). This is not only true in our laboratory, but has beenpublished by other labs (Taylor and Baicu, 2009). One explanation forthe poor viability after freezing is the diffusion barrier that 3-Dtissues inherently possess. Thus, most standard cell cryopreservationprotocols work poorly with 3-D cell clusters.

The inventive 3-D clusters of reaggregated cells can be cryopreservedintact and with increased viability over native cryopreserved and thawedislets. The self-directed assembly of the clusters, in which the cellscommunicate through cell signaling to arrange in the structure accordingto their respective cellular requirements, increases the overall chancesof success for each cell in the structure. In addition, as described inprevious work, US 2010/0233239 or US 2013/0029875, the reaggregatedclusters have substantially improved (lower) diffusion barriers allowingall cells in the structure substantially equal access to nutrients andcell culture conditions. As demonstrated by the inventive work herein,the 3-D cell clusters not only have improved viability generally, butthrough modified cryopreservation techniques also have improvedviability during cryopreservation, storage, and thawing of intact 3-Dclusters. That is, the inventive 3-D cell clusters can be cryopreservedunder controlled rate freezing, as described in the working examples, toyield a cryopreserved 3-D cell cluster. These 3-D cell clusters can bestored under liquid nitrogen, and then thawed according to the protocolsdescribed herein. Advantageously, due to the improved diffusion barriersof the engineered islets, these islets have increased viability ascompared to native cryopreserved and thawed 3-D tissues, such as islets.This is because the cells in the 3-D clusters have substantially equalaccess to the cryoprotectant and thawing media, and undergo a moreuniform freezing and thawing process throughout the entirety of the 3-Dstructure of the reaggregated cells. This substantially improvesviability outcomes.

While cryopreservation of engineered tissues and other small 3-D cellclusters offers an improvement over standard tissue cryopreservationtechniques, we can further improve the process with our micro-moldtechnology. Cryopreserving the single dispersed cells from any tissueresults in improved outcomes compared to freezing larger sections oftissue. Thus, in a second protocol for creating and preservingengineered islets, the tissue is dispersed into single cells, which arecryopreserve, and upon thawing, loaded into our micro-molds for 3-Dformation as shown schematically in FIG. 11.

In traditional cryopreservation, cells may adhere to the surface of aculture flask or plate and then non-viable cells are washed away 24-48hours later. Cell cultures are proliferated and expanded to increase theamount of available cells. In the present invention, we have shown thatengineered islets can be produced with viability over 99%. With anappropriate cryopreservation protocol to freeze single islet cells, weare able to produce high viability tissues, especially aftercryopreservation of the single cell components. Furthermore, we haveshown that native islets that do survive cryopreservation have a veryshort life span, with nearly 100% cell death 72 hours after thawing.Engineered tissues, in contrast, are able to be maintained after thawingfor several days without noticeable drops in viability.

This method could also be used for collecting tissue matches forregenerative medicine such as cell clusters for transplantations. Forinstance, if ideal donor tissue is made available, but no suitable matchcan be found, the tissue could be saved back as single cells for futureengineering and use for an islet transplantation for a diabetic patientlater.

This method also allows for drug screening on human islets to becompleted in a more efficient manner.

Additional advantages of the various embodiments of the invention willbe apparent to those skilled in the art upon review of the disclosureherein and the working examples below. It will be appreciated that thevarious embodiments described herein are not necessarily mutuallyexclusive unless otherwise indicated herein. For example, a featuredescribed or depicted in one embodiment may also be included in otherembodiments, but is not necessarily included. Thus, the presentinvention encompasses a variety of combinations and/or integrations ofthe specific embodiments described herein.

As used herein, the phrase “and/or,” when used in a list of two or moreitems, means that any one of the listed items can be employed by itselfor any combination of two or more of the listed items can be employed.For example, if a composition is described as containing or excludingcomponents A, B, and/or C, the composition can contain or exclude Aalone; B alone; C alone; A and B in combination; A and C in combination;B and C in combination; or A, B, and C in combination.

The present description also uses numerical ranges to quantify certainparameters relating to various embodiments of the invention. It shouldbe understood that when numerical ranges are provided, such ranges areto be construed as providing literal support for claim limitations thatonly recite the lower value of the range as well as claim limitationsthat only recite the upper value of the range. For example, a disclosednumerical range of about 10 to about 100 provides literal support for aclaim reciting “greater than about 10” (with no upper bounds) and aclaim reciting “less than about 100” (with no lower bounds).

REFERENCES

-   Lakey J R, Burridge P W, Shapiro A M. Technical aspects of islet    preparation and transplantation. Transpl Int. 2003 September;    16(9):613-32.-   MacGregor R R, Williams S J, Tong P Y, Kover K, Moore W V,    Stehno-Bittel L. Small rat islets are superior to large islets in in    vitro function and in transplantation outcomes. Am. J. Physiol.    Endocrinol. Metab. 2006; 290(5); E771-779.-   Ramachandran et al. Engineering islets for improved performance by    optimized reaggregation in a micro-mold. Tissue Engineering. 2013;    March; 19(5-6):604-12.-   Taylor M J, Baicu S. Review of vitreous islet cryopreservation.    Organogenesis. 2009; 5(3):155-166.

EXAMPLES

The following examples set forth methods in accordance with theinvention. It is to be understood, however, that these examples areprovided by way of illustration and nothing therein should be taken as alimitation upon the overall scope of the invention.

Example 1 Hybrid Stem Cell/Adult Cell Clusters

We have been able to create mixed spheroids using adult rat islet cellsand rat bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (FIG. 12). The protocol isprovided below. Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) weretrypsinized from the cell culture flask in which they were cultured andexpanded. We have also tested MSC from umbilical cord. The BMSCs werethen placed in a tube and the cell number was counted using ahemocytometer. Native/primary pancreatic islets were isolated and brokendown into single cells. Briefly, rats were anesthetized byintraperitoneal injection of a mixture of ketamine and xylazine. Afterthe peritoneal cavity was exposed, the pancreatic main duct to theduodenum was clamped, cannulated in situ via the common bile duct, anddistended with cold collagenase (CLS1, 450 units/ml; Worthington,Lakewood, N.J.). After excision, the pancreas was incubated for 20-30minutes with gentle tumbling in a 37° C. incubator. The contents of thetube were washed, passed through a 100 μm mesh screen, and sedimented ina refrigerated centrifuge. The pellet was mixed with Histopaque(density=1.1085) and centrifuged. The islets, collected from thegradient, were sedimented and washed over a sterile 40 μm mesh cellstrainer. Islets were placed into a modified DMEM/F-12 mediumsupplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), 1%antibiotic/antimycotic and allowed to recover overnight in an incubatorat 37° C. and 5% CO₂.

The isolated islets were dispersed into single cell suspensions. Isletswere washed twice with calcium- and magnesium-free HBSS (cmf-HBSS)before addition of digestion medium consisting of cmf-HBSS supplementedwith 4.8 mM HEPES and papain (5 units/ml; Worthington, Lakewood, N.J.).Suspensions were incubated on a rotator at 37° C. for 20 minutes. Isletswere dispersed by trituration using a pipette until the cell suspensionprimarily contained single cells. The cells were then washed to removeresidual papain and transferred to a customized DMEM:F12-based,serum-free islet aggregate culture medium. Occasionally, a sample wastaken and cell counts and yield were determined using a hemocytometer.

The isolated islets and BMSCs were mixed in the desired ratios. We haveproduced islet/stem cell clusters in a 1:6 ratio of islet cells toBMSCs, and in 1:1 ratios. However, the variations in the ratios andnumber of donor sources from which cells are derived is limitless. Thisratio can be determined based on the needs of the experiment/product.

The media for production of the mixed cell clusters consisted of:

-   -   DMEM-F:12 with 10% fetal bovine serum and 1% antibiotics; or    -   CMRL1066 with 10% fetal bovine serum and 1% antibiotics        The mixed cells were then cultured on the micro-molds, as        described in US 2010/0233239; US 2013/0029875, incorporated by        reference herein. Glass micro-molds were fabricated through a        multistep process that included thin-film deposition,        photolithography, and wet etching techniques. Briefly, pre-cut        discs from Precision Glass and Optics (Santa Ana, Calif.) were        used for the initial substrate. The glass substrates were        cleaned using acid and base piranha solutions and dried at        200° C. to ensure the surface was free of moisture. One surface        of the glass substrates was sputtered with a layer of chromium        (Lesker Thin Film Deposition System). Positive photoresist        (AZ1518) was spin-cast onto the chromium surface and pre-baked        at 100° C. for 2 minutes. A transparency mask template was        created containing the defined geometry and layout of wells to        be etched using computer-assisted design (CAD) in AutoCAD        software (Autodesk) and high-resolution transparency masks were        printed. The photoresist-coated discs were exposed to UV-light        through the transparency mask for 4 seconds. The exposed glass        was then post exposure baked at 100° C. for 10 minutes and then        immersed in developer (AZ 300 MIF Developer) to pattern the        photoresist layer. The chromium layer was subsequently etched        (CR7S Chromium Etchant) using the photoresist as an etch mask.        The glass substrate was then washed with water and dried with        nitrogen. To etch the pattern into the surface of the glass, the        disc was wet etched by immersion in a buffered oxide etch (BOE)        solution containing a 14:20:66 ratio of HNO₃ to HF to H₂O        respectively. A profilometer (Tencor Alphastep 200) was used        periodically to measure the etched surface and adjustments were        made accordingly. The remaining photoresist and chromium layers        were removed to reveal the etched micro-mold comprising a        plurality of divots formed in the surface of the micro-mold        substrate.

The cell mixture was cultured on the micro-molds until cluster formationoccurred. Clusters were also created using only BMSCs as a control.Media was changed every 24-48 hours while incubating at 37° C. and 5%CO₂. Viability was measured. There was approximately 50% viability incell clusters created only from MSC with the majority of cell death dueto apoptosis (FIG. 13). However, when BMSCs were combined with isletcells prior to loading into the micro-mold, then the viability of all ofthe cells, including the BMSCs, improved to approximately 97% (FIG. 13).It is believed that this self-directed assembly that leads to clusterformation also increases the ability of the cells to arrange accordingto their respective needs and avoid apoptosis.

In subsequent work, the BMSCs were stained red so that they could bedistinguished from other cells in the hybrid clusters. In the exampleshown in FIG. 14, the BMSCs (stained red) were found distributedthroughout the hybrid cluster.

Example 2 Multi-Donor Cell Clusters

Mixed preparations of 3-D cell clusters, each from different donors(FIG. 8, left) have been created from isolated pancreatic isletsaccording to the procedures described in Example 1. The single cellsuspensions were then plated onto micro-molds. Within several minutes,cells began to settle into the recesses of the micro-mold and were inclose proximity to each other allowing cell-cell re-adhesion.Micro-molds were incubated for 3-5 days at 37° C. and 5% CO₂. Aggregateculture medium was changed every 24 to 48 hours until reaggregatedislets were formed. The reaggregated clusters were removed by simplywashing the micro-mold several times with culture medium until isletsdislodged and were aspirated with a pipette. Mixtures of thesereaggregated clusters could then be used for testing.

Single cell clusters composed of cells from multiple donors wereproduced by plating cell mixtures containing cells from 2 or more donorsat desired ratios onto the micro-molds. Using the aforementionedtechniques, we have created 3-D cell clusters in the shape of spheroidsfrom cells from two different donors. The hybrid spheroids had extremelyhigh viability (over 95% viable cells). In addition, there was no signof inflammation or cellular rejection of the cells from differentdonors.

The multi-donor engineered islets provide an averaged response to drugtesting. FIG. 9 shows the glucose-stimulated release of insulin innative islets from 2 different donors. The data was gathered using aStatic Insulin Secretion study. The reaggregated islets wereequilibrated overnight in DMEM/F-12 medium containing 5 mM glucose and10% FBS (low glucose medium). Native islets were used for comparison,and handpicked using a micropipette and a known quantity of isletequivalents were distributed in 24-well plates. The multi-donorengineered islets and native islets were subject to low glucose (5 mM),high glucose (17.5 mM) or high glucose with KCl (20 mM). After 60minutes of static incubation at 37° C. and 5% CO₂, conditioned mediasamples were collected and frozen at −80° C. The insulin concentrationwas later quantified using an insulin ELISA kit (Alpco). Native isletsfrom donor 1 dumped a large concentration of insulin into the media,which was not dependent on the glucose or K⁺ concentration, thusillustrating an abnormal response, even though donor 1 was screened fordisease and the islets appeared healthy when received. Native isletsfrom donor 2 released less total insulin, but did show a normalK⁺-stimulated increase in insulin secretion. However, when the nativeislets from these two different donors were mixed together andreaggregated using our process into multi-source islets, they nowresponded to high glucose levels and K⁺ with normal increases in insulinsecretion.

Instead of using the micro-molds, multi-source or multi-donor spheroidscould be created by plating the cell mixtures within or attached to ascaffold material. For example, we have created multi-cell typespheroids within decellularlized Wharton's Jelly (FIG. 15).

Example 3 Cryopreservation Techniques

The standard protocol for cryopreservation has been altered tosuccessfully preserve and thaw engineered islets. In addition, improvedproperties of the engineered islets themselves lend them to improvedcryopreservation outcomes. The processes are illustrated in FIG. 19.

In the first protocol, the effect of cryopreservation and thawing wascompared between fresh, native islets from human donors and reaggregatedislets engineered from human donor islet cells. Engineered FreezingMedia was used for the freezing procedure and contains: CMRL-1066 media(Sigma); 1% antibiotic and antimycotic solution; 1% L-glutamine; 16.8μM/L, Zinc Sulfate; 10% Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS); 10 μM Curcumin. Themedia was buffered with 25 mM HEPES to a final pH of 7.3-7.5.

Before cryopreservation, the engineered islets were maintained overnightat 37° C. in the incubator at 95% air and 5% CO₂ in RPMI-1640 (Sigma)medium supplemented with 5 mM/L glucose, 10% fetal bovine serum, 1%antibiotic and antimycotic solution, 1% L-glutamine, 16.8 μM/L, zincsulphate, buffered with 25 Mm/L HEPES. After culturing the engineeredislets overnight, they were centrifuged at 2,500 rpm for 5 minutes at22° C.

The centrifuged pellet was then re-suspended in 200 μL of the EngineeredFreezing Media and transferred into a 1.8 mL cryotube, which was kept onice. Over the next 6 minutes, 100 μL of the Engineered CryoprotectiveSolution was added to the cryotube every 1 min. The EngineeredCryoprotective Solution contains 10% DMSO with 10 μM curcumin inCMRL-1066 media. The cryotube was then transferred to a cool cell andkept in the cell in a −80° C. freezer, with controlled freezing at arate of −1° C./minute. After 8 hours the cryotube was transferred intoliquid nitrogen where it is stored until thawing.

For thawing, the cryotube was removed from the liquid nitrogen and theengineered islets were allowed to thaw rapidly to 0° C. As soon as thelast ice crystal had disappeared, the tube was centrifuged at 2,500 rpmfor 5 min at 4° C. The supernatant was removed and 200 μL of 0.75 MEngineered Sucrose Solution was added every 5 minutes for a period of 30minutes at 4° C. The Engineered Sucrose Solution contained: CMRL-1066media; 1% antibiotic and antimycotic solution; 1% L-glutamine; 10% FBS;and 0.75 M sucrose.

Sequential dilution of the Engineered Sucrose Solution was completed byadding 2.5, 2.5, 5.0, and 10.0 mL of Engineered Freezing Media in astepwise manner over the next 20 minutes. Subsequently, the thawedislets were centrifuged at 2,500 rpm for 5 minutes and the supernatantremoved. The engineered islets were resuspended in Engineered FreezingMedia and transferred to culture plates where they were maintained at37° C. in an atmosphere of 95% air and 5% CO₂.

The smaller size and lower diffusion barrier of engineered islets ascompared to native islets, allowed for the cryopreservation media topenetrate the core of the engineered islet and protect all cells duringthe freezing process (FIG. 10B). Compared to the core cell deathmeasured in the native islet, the engineered islets survived thecryopreservation procedure much better.

In the second protocol for creating and preserving engineered islets,the tissue is first dispersed into single cells for cryopreservation,instead of cryopreserving the intact islet. This procedure is shownschematically in FIG. 11, and contrasted with the process ofcryopreserved whole islets. Native islet tissue is dispersed into singleislet cells using the protocols described above. The single islet cellsare maintained overnight in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 5 mM/Lglucose, 10% FBS, 1% antibiotic and antimycotic solution, 1%L-glutamine, 16.8 μM/L, zinc sulphate buffered with 25 Mm/L HEPES at 37°C. in the incubator at 95% air and 5% CO₂. After culturing the isletcells overnight, they were centrifuged at 2,500 rpm for 5 minutes at 22°C.

The centrifuged pellet was then re-suspended in 200 μL of Cell FreezingMedia and transferred into a 1.8 mL cryotube, which was kept on ice. TheCell Freezing Media contained: RPMI-1640 media; 1% antibiotic andantimycotic solution; 1% L-glutamine; 16.8 μM/L Zinc Sulfate; 10% FBS;10 μM Curcumin; and 5 mM/L glucose. The media was buffered with HEPES toa final pH of 7.3-7.5. Over the next 6 minutes, 100 μL of the CellCryoprotective Solution was added to the cryotube every 1 min. The CellCryoprotective Solution contained 10% DMSO with 10 μM curcumin inRPMI-1640 media. The cryotube was then transferred to a cool cell andkept in the cell in a −80° C. freezer, with controlled freezing at arate of −1° C./minute. After 8 hours, the cryotube was transferred toliquid nitrogen, where it was stored until thawing.

The cryotubes were removed from the liquid nitrogen and the islet cellswere allowed to thaw rapidly to 0° C. As soon as the last ice crystalhad disappeared, the tube was centrifuged at 2,500 rpm for 5 min at 4°C. The supernatant was removed and 200 μL of 0.75 M sucrose solution wasadded every 5 minutes for a period of 30 minutes at 4° C. The Islet CellSucrose Solution contained: RPMI-1640 media; 1% antibiotic andantimycotic solution; 1% L-glutamine; 10% FBS; 5 mM glucose; and 0.75 Msucrose.

Sequential dilution of the Islet Cell Sucrose Solution was completed byadding 2.5, 2.5, 5.0, and 10.0 mL of Islet Cell Freezing Media in astepwise manner over the next 20 minutes. Subsequently, the cells werecentrifuged at 2,500 rpm for 5 minutes and the supernatant was removed.The islet cells were resuspended in Islet Cell Freezing Media andtransferred to culture plates or the micro-mold for reaggregation, wherethey were maintained at 37° C. in an atmosphere of 95% air and 5% CO₂.

Breaking the islets into single cells for freezing removes the diffusionbarrier that islets possess that can prevent cryoprotectants fromreaching the core of the islet, latent heat of ice crystallization fromescaping the core, or a number of other possible issues during thefreezing or thawing process. The reaggregation of the islet cellspost-cryopreservation allows the viable cells to reaggregate, while anydead cells are left behind. FIG. 16 illustrates some of the differentprotocols and medias tested to finally produce the optimalcryopreservation protocol that resulted in adequate viability. Thedescribed cryopreservation techniques are so improved that there is nostatistically significant difference in the percentage of live cellsfrom fresh engineered islets and islets engineered from cryopreservedislet cells (FIG. 17B).

A direct comparison of the changes measured in viability aftercryopreservation of native islets versus cryopreservation of engineeredislets using the method described here is shown in FIG. 17. There is adramatic increase in the cell death after cryopreservation of nativeislets that is mainly due to apoptosis, but this shift is not notedafter cryopreservation of engineered islets, using the methods describedhere. FIG. 18 shows that the islet cells respond to a midrangeconcentration of islets, but fail to respond further when the glucoseconcentration is too high (hyperphysiological). This is normal in freshtissue (FIG. 18, open bars), and is maintained after cryopreservation.

What is claimed:
 1. A 3-dimensional cluster of reaggregated cellscomprising cells reaggregated from at least two different cell sources,wherein said cluster comprises cells reaggregated from differentiatedstem cells from a first source and cells from a second source.
 2. The3-dimensional cluster of claim 1, wherein said cells from a secondsource are islet cells selected from the group consisting of beta cells,alpha cells, delta cells, and combinations thereof.
 3. The 3-dimensionalcluster of claim 2, wherein the cluster comprises about 70% beta cells,about 20% alpha cells, and about 10% delta cells, based upon the totalnumber of islet cells in the cluster.
 4. The 3-dimensional cluster ofclaim 2, wherein the ratio of islet cells to differentiated stem cellsin said cluster is from 2:1 to 1:2.
 5. The 3-dimensional cluster ofclaim 1, wherein said cells from a second source are selected from thegroup consisting of chondrocytes, osteocytes, osteoblasts, myocardialcells, vascular cells, epithelial cells, hepatocytes, fibroblasts,smooth muscle cells, cancer cells, endothelial cells, and combinationsthereof.
 6. The 3-dimensional cluster of claim 1, wherein said differentcell sources are different cell donors.
 7. The 3-dimensional cluster ofclaim 6, wherein said donors are different genders, genotypes, ages,races, ethnic groups, enzymatic or metabolic activities, species, ordisease or health states.
 8. The 3-dimensional cluster of claim 6,wherein each of said donors are of the same species, sub-species,gender, race, ethnic group, age, geographic region, disease state, orbody mass index.
 9. A method of transplanting cells into a transplantrecipient, said method comprising: providing a 3-dimensional cluster ofreaggregated cells according to claim 1, wherein at least one cellsource comprises stem cells from said recipient and at least one cellsource comprises donor tissue to be transplanted; and transplanting said3-dimensional cluster of reaggregated cells into said recipient.
 10. Themethod of claim 9, wherein said providing comprises: providing stemcells from said recipient prior to said transplanting; differentiatingsaid stem cells; mixing said differentiated stem cells with donor tissuecells to be transplanted; introducing said mixture of cells into amicro-mold comprising a non-adherent, divoted substrate comprising asubstantially planar top surface, wherein the substantially planar topsurface comprises a plurality of divots formed therein, wherein eachdivot contains said mixture of recipient stem cells and donor tissuecells; and incubating said micro-mold under cell culture conditions,wherein said single cells in each divot reaggregate into a 3-dimensionalcell cluster comprising cells reaggregated from said recipient and saiddonor.
 11. A method of cryopreserving 3-dimensional cell clusters, saidmethod comprising: providing a 3-dimensional cluster of reaggregatedcells comprising cells reaggregated from at least two different cellsources; suspending said 3-dimensional cluster in freezing media, saidfreezing media comprising cell culture media, curcumin, and acryoprotectant; and cryopreserving said 3-dimensional cluster undercontrolled rate freezing at a rate of −1° C./min to yield acryopreserved 3-dimensional cell cluster.
 12. The method of claim 11,wherein said 3-dimensional cluster of reaggregated cells is anengineered islet.
 13. The method of claim 11, wherein said freezingmedia further comprises antibiotics, antimycotics, L-glutamine, zincsulfate, serum, buffer, or a combination thereof.
 14. The method ofclaim 11, wherein said cryoprotectant comprises a solution of dimethylsulfoxide and curcumin.
 15. The method of claim 11, further comprisingthawing said cryopreserved 3-dimensional cell cluster.
 16. A method ofcryopreserving cells for 3-dimensional cell clusters, said methodcomprising: dispersing cells from a tissue into single cells; suspendingsaid single cells in freezing media, said freezing media comprising cellculture media and a cryoprotectant; cryopreserving said single cellsunder controlled rate freezing at a rate of −1° C./min to yieldcryopreserved single cells; thawing said cryopreserved single cells;transferring said thawed single cells to a micro-mold comprising anon-adherent, divoted substrate comprising a substantially planar topsurface, wherein the substantially planar top surface comprises aplurality of divots formed therein, said divots each containing aplurality of said thawed single cells; and incubating said micro-moldunder cell culture conditions, wherein said single cells in each divotreaggregate into a 3-dimensional cell cluster comprising cellsreaggregated from said cryopreserved and thawed single cells.
 17. Themethod of claim 16, wherein said tissue is pancreatic tissue.
 18. Themethod of claim 16, wherein said single cells are islet cells, whereinsaid 3-dimensional cell cluster has increased viability as compared to anative cryopreserved and thawed islet.